Can anyone point me to irrefutable evidence that humans are causing global warming?

I've never been able to find any. If someone can direct me to the actaul scientific study results that prove beyond doubt that recent human activity
is causing catastrophic global warming I would appreciate it.

You cannot prove it, but you can get a resonable handle on just what is happening, there will always be doubt but can we afford it? When the
consequences could mean millions of people dead?

Check out this link here as it has the most up to date research on the subject.

I believe it is a problem that we are causing. Allthough "Global Warming" is just a catchphrase most Climatologists prefer the term "Human
Influenced Climate Change". We can change the environment its been proven just look around you from time to time over the next 10-20 years and you we
see that I am talking the truth. C02 however has the potential to change the WHOLE WORLD.

And do you know why? Because humanity has been studying weather scientifically for about 150 years. On top of that only the last 50 have been
fairly accurate. So that leaves a gap of only a few billion years. So in the grand scheme of things humans know diddly-squat of the Earth's
weather patterns and how they work, change, and interact.

If you haven't read "State of Fear" by Michael Crichton, I'd suggest you check it out. The novel -- from a character and plot aspect -- isn't as
good as you'd expect from the author of Andromeda Strain, Jurassic Park, or Rising Sun.

However, it's impeccably researched and footnoted, and should provide you with a lot of good insights about just maybe the whole global warming thing
is overblown, if not actually bogus.

No one can show you a study that proves global warming exists. There is no such study. Inferences and predictions can be modeled, proposed, and
studied, but no, it can't be proven that humans are causing global warming.

However one can look at multiple scientific studies, historical climactic/weather data, and data from observed geological processes, ie volcanoes and
consider these in conjunction with observed weather/climate patterns and one of multiple other predictive methods and form a reasonably sound
scientific theory.

Even in light of this 'reasonably sound scientific theory,' it can't be 'proven' that humans are the cause of it. However this doesn't mean we
should just ignore what we do know and make reasonalbe inferences about simply because it can't be proven beyond a doubt.

Besides proving anything without a doubt is a highly personal thing. For some God is proven without a doubt, but not for all. In the minds of some the
evidence for the existence of the Illuminati is undeniable and 'proven.' Others remain skeptical.

Strong UV light breaks apart the ODS molecule. CFCs, HCFCs, carbon tetrachloride, methyl chloroform, and other gases release chlorine atoms, and
halons and methyl bromide release bromine atoms (3). It is these atoms that actually destroy ozone, not the intact ODS molecule. It is estimated that
one chlorine atom can destroy over 100,000 ozone molecules before it is removed from the stratosphere (4).

I think the real question here is "How Much" influence do we have on the climate. It can easily be argued that we can influence the environment to
a great extent. But the earth has warmed and cooled many times before industrial society and before even humans. Is THIS warming being caused by us,
accelerated by us, or neither. I've never seen any reports or studies that draw any corrilations between our current warming trend and the Earth's
natural warming and cooling cycles. Personally, I have some trouble with the idea that only about 100 years of human industry are responsible. And
hell, if these scientists are so certain we can do this to the Earth in 100 years, then it seems like all the arguments against terriforming Mars
bunk.

100 years ? Where did you get the idea that humans only started polution the air 100 years agaio? It was as bad if not worse 300 years agaio and the
start of Massive co2 input into the air started about 500 years agaio .
you think because they had no cars or power plants they put no co2 into the air? The co2 content started going up drasticly when the english
french and other so called advanced countrys started using Coal for heating.
Now this may not seam bad as the poplation was much less but look it up they had ZERO polution control and the smog got so thick at times it got
to be like twlight at noon.
oil and coal = 200 to 300 million years of stored co2 when earth was young it had a 1000 times the amount of co2 in the air it has now .(this was
befor life was (Created ,evolved) once life came onto the scean in the form of plants for the first 100 million years it started storing the co2 and
rising the oxagen leavel to the point animal life was able to evolve.
If we could put all the co2 traped in the earth as oil coal and what ever else back into the air earth would no longer be able to suport aminal
life of any kind untill plants brought it back down again .
But as it is now we are Rising the co2 leavels back up closer to what the earth was like during the Dino days when the averge temp of earth was
closer to 60F . Ps the averge temp of earth now is 32F .(look it up)
We will contu to stick our heads in the sand untill we suffacate on our man made putrid stench . Co2 undreathable at 40% even with 60% oxagen you
DIE . co2=23% now. carbon monxide POISION .
its not you who will suffer its your kids and at this rate there will be no grand kids . Manny of the time I wish I could do something to stop
this I hate being a dinosore but I aloso relise you already know this as most people know this but will contunue to add to it just as i add to it .
But even if I was to go amish it wouldent help so I watch my planet die along with the rest of you .the only difference between us is I know im the
problem and admite it.

Even if it were 1,000 years of coal and petroleum burning, that's hardly a dent in the 65 mil since the dinosaurs. I suppose thats what killed them
too, borontosaurs riding around in their giant SUVs. It's a miracle there was enough oxygen left for us to evolve at all!

Uh... what? Other things give off microwaves. Radars for instance. How do you think the microwave oven was invented? Maybe it's just an urban myth,
but the story I remember from long ago was this man was working on a radar and after standing near it while in operation for so long he realized his
chocolate bar had melted. After studying it, he came to the conclusion that it was from the radar dish and he developed the microwave from there
on.

Anyway, instead of just making a simple statement like that, why don't you try giving some information to back up what you have to say? Thanks.

I heard he was experimenting with electromagnetic energy in his lab when his chocholate bar melted.

But to answer your question, we have never had any major snowstorm since the blizzard of '90.
All we've gotten this year in Wisconsin is like 8 inches, which is melting right now because it's getting into the 40's. Wisconsin, 40°, January,
it doesn't add up. Global warming, perhaps?

California, I heard, had 20 feet of snow in some places. Texas got more snow than us at one point. Doesn't that sound somewhat peculiar to you?

But the upside is watching Southerners driving 15 miles per hour, on the highway, when there's only an inch of snow. They freak out when they see
people driving "normally" in these "conditions".

But I think it's global warming, and to be honest I hate it. Where's my snow?!

I might be able to help you in one aspect of your question. At any current time on the planet Earth, there are give or take 6.4-6.6 billion men, women
and children. Now the next factor in this equation we will look to livestock. Cattle,sheep, pork you get the the sense. If we were to count all the
livestock and give it a lowball figure for an average, we would be in the relm of 20.-20.4 billion animals running, grazing,having a good time and
talking dirty. The next factor is the methane these creatures expel and we cannot forget about ouselves. A human fart is on the avg. about 6/10's of
a cubic ft. on a daily avg.Now from where I sit, that is a lot of methane and Co2 if you want to run the numbers. You will need to know that the avg.
combined farting stats. on avg. would be 3/10cft. for the livestock. Now that is a bunch of gas that we and our food supply are putting into the
atomsphere. Do not forget about all of the coal fired ele. plants located on every continent on the Earth. Also another factor is the natural Co2 and
methane given off on any day due to the fact that it occures naturally in nature. Any way you look at the problem of methane in our atmosphere or the
Co2, we cannot escape its influences unless we surround ourselves in a shell. Even then, we would have to have mech. scrubbers to seperate it from the
O2 and do the whole recycle thing. If you run the numbers you will see for yourself that is a lot of gas.

"Human Influenced Climate Change" is a much more approptiate term than Global Warming. And it is also of very serious concern. I wonder how does
anyone not think that detonating nuclear devices at high altitudes within our atmosphere will have unknown and quite possibly negative results?

Taken from the book Angels Dont Play This HAARP by Dr. Nick Begich and Jeane Manning.

From a New York Times article, "Cluster of Power Plants Found to Change Weather" June 5, 1977.

Scientits discovered that just the location of power plants could affect weather. They discovered that when power plants are clustered together
they alter local weather patterns. Within six to twelve miles downwind of these facilities, rainfall could increase by as much as 25 percent more than
normal, and at further distances rainfall might decrease. They concluded that the changes were the result of released heat.

From a New York Times article, "Receding Ice on Arctic Sea Hints at Global Warming" by William K. Stevens, July 4, 1991, pg.A11.

The atricle said that Arctic ice had decreased by 2% in only a nine year period.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.